My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-16-23 PTRC
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
Commissions, Committees, and Boards
>
Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee (PTRC)
>
PTRC Packets (2010 to Present)
>
2020-2029
>
2023
>
05-16-23 PTRC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/11/2023 9:20:10 AM
Creation date
5/11/2023 9:19:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Parks, Trails & Recreation Committee Meeting Minutes April 18, 2023 Page 5 <br /> <br /> <br />Committee Member Poelzer responded the City would own the equipment and take care of it. <br /> <br />Committee Member Nelson mentioned that they discussed creating separate areas for large and <br />small dogs and felt this would conflict with that goal. <br /> <br />Committee Member Poelzer said the recommendation would be that it go into the large dog area <br />if the space was divided, but right now the park isn’t divided. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding separating the dog park into small and large dog areas. <br /> <br />Committee Member Nelson felt the agility equipment was better than having a fence to separate <br />the dogs. <br /> <br />Committee Member Jacobson asked what the overall plan was for Perry Dog Park, she uses it but <br />felt it wasn’t a very nice park to go to, it’s often muddy, no water. She thought this equipment <br />would be great but there are other things that would make it a better park. <br /> <br />Recreation Supervisor Johnson said the park is being updated with a shade structure, trees and a <br />few other things. <br /> <br />Committee Member Anderson stated that as a small dog owner that was afraid of other dogs <br />there is no way she would bring her dog to the park while other big dogs are there. The equipment <br />is a great idea but would like to have more input from the community on separating it. She would <br />feel more comfortable is there was a section for small dogs. <br /> <br />Committee Member Poelzer recommended separation because she sees a lot of small dogs in the <br />area but not in the park. <br /> <br />Committee Member Nelson felt they should have an overall plan with input from residents rather <br />than adhoc decisions about equipment and fencing. <br /> <br />Committee Member Nelson asked to add a friendly amendment to the motion, to engage the <br />community in the overall vision of what the dog park should look like. <br /> <br />Committee Member Kelliher said he was hearing the item be tabled until such time as they could <br />do a survey. <br /> <br />Committee Member Nelson said not entirely, he wouldn’t want to pass on this opportunity. <br /> <br />Committee Member Poelzer noted the trees are in, the shelter has been ordered and going in, and <br />the entrance will have cement. <br /> <br />Chair Hinton amended the motion to say the City should accept the donation and the <br />equipment be installed on the side of the park that might become the large dog area if it were <br />split, and they look at community input on whether they’d like the park split into large and <br />small dog areas. Committee Member Rogers seconded the amendment. The motion passed <br />unanimously. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.